Literature DB >> 24007250

New strategies for human papillomavirus-based cervical screening.

Attila Lorincz1, Alejandra Castanon, Anita Wey Wey Lim, Peter Sasieni.   

Abstract

Human papillomavirus testing has been shown to be far more sensitive and robust in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 and above (and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 and above) for cervical screening than approaches based on either cytology or visual inspection; however, there are a number of issues that need to be overcome if it is to substantially reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with cervical cancer at the population level. The two main issues are coverage (increasing the number of women who participate in screening) and the management of women who test positive for high-risk human papillomavirus. This article will review the potential for vaginal self-collection to improve coverage and the options for triage of high-risk human papillomavirus-positive women in high-resource and low-resource settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24007250      PMCID: PMC3880859          DOI: 10.2217/whe.13.48

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)        ISSN: 1745-5057


  82 in total

1.  Primary screening for high risk HPV by home obtained cervicovaginal lavage is an alternative screening tool for unscreened women.

Authors:  M A E Nobbenhuis; T J M Helmerhorst; A J C van den Brule; L Rozendaal; L H Jaspars; F J Voorhorst; R H M Verheijen; C J L M Meijer
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Long-term absolute risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse following human papillomavirus infection: role of persistence.

Authors:  Susanne K Kjær; Kirsten Frederiksen; Christian Munk; Thomas Iftner
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-09-14       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Conjunctive p16INK4a testing significantly increases accuracy in diagnosing high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.

Authors:  Christine Bergeron; Jaume Ordi; Dietmar Schmidt; Marcus J Trunk; Thomas Keller; Ruediger Ridder
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.493

4.  Self-sampling versus reminder letter: effects on cervical cancer screening attendance and coverage in Finland.

Authors:  Anni Virtanen; Ahti Anttila; Tapio Luostarinen; Pekka Nieminen
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2010-07-28       Impact factor: 7.396

5.  Efficacy of human papillomavirus testing for the detection of invasive cervical cancers and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Guglielmo Ronco; Paolo Giorgi-Rossi; Francesca Carozzi; Massimo Confortini; Paolo Dalla Palma; Annarosa Del Mistro; Bruno Ghiringhello; Salvatore Girlando; Anna Gillio-Tos; Laura De Marco; Carlo Naldoni; Paola Pierotti; Raffaella Rizzolo; Patrizia Schincaglia; Manuel Zorzi; Marco Zappa; Nereo Segnan; Jack Cuzick
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Exploring the acceptability of two self-sampling devices for human papillomavirus testing in the cervical screening context: a qualitative study of Muslim women in London.

Authors:  Anne Szarewski; Louise Cadman; Lesley Ashdown-Barr; Jo Waller
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.136

7.  Human papillomavirus and Papanicolaou tests to screen for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Pontus Naucler; Walter Ryd; Sven Törnberg; Anders Strand; Göran Wadell; Kristina Elfgren; Thomas Rådberg; Björn Strander; Bo Johansson; Ola Forslund; Bengt-Göran Hansson; Eva Rylander; Joakim Dillner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-10-18       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  A comparison of cervical and vaginal human papillomavirus.

Authors:  Philip E Castle; Ana C Rodriguez; Carolina Porras; Rolando Herrero; Mark Schiffman; Paula Gonzalez; Allan Hildesheim; Robert D Burk
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.830

9.  HPV self-sampling as an alternative strategy in non-attenders for cervical screening - a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  A Szarewski; L Cadman; D Mesher; J Austin; L Ashdown-Barr; R Edwards; D Lyons; J Walker; J Christison; A Frater; J Waller
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Estimating the efficacy of screening by auditing smear histories of women with and without cervical cancer. The National Co-ordinating Network for Cervical Screening Working Group.

Authors:  P D Sasieni; J Cuzick; E Lynch-Farmery
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Molecular tests potentially improving HPV screening and genotyping for cervical cancer prevention.

Authors:  Ana Gradíssimo; Robert D Burk
Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 5.225

2.  Optimal positive cutoff points for careHPV testing of clinician- and self-collected specimens in primary cervical cancer screening: an analysis from rural China.

Authors:  Le-Ni Kang; Jose Jeronimo; You-Lin Qiao; Fang-Hui Zhao; Wen Chen; Melissa Valdez; Xun Zhang; Pooja Bansil; Proma Paul; Ping Bai; Roger Peck; Jing Li; Feng Chen; Mark H Stoler; Philip E Castle
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Are vaginal swabs comparable to cervical smears for human papillomavirus DNA testing?

Authors:  Liselotte Coorevits; Ans Traen; Luc Bingé; Jo Van Dorpe; Marleen Praet; Jerina Boelens; Elizaveta Padalko
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 4.401

4.  Implementation strategies to improve cervical cancer prevention in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review.

Authors:  Lauren G Johnson; Allison Armstrong; Caroline M Joyce; Anne M Teitelman; Alison M Buttenheim
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 7.327

5.  Performance of a DNA methylation marker panel using liquid-based cervical scrapes to detect cervical cancer and its precancerous stages.

Authors:  Martina Schmitz; Kristin Eichelkraut; Dana Schmidt; Ilona Zeiser; Ziad Hilal; Zena Tettenborn; Alfred Hansel; Hans Ikenberg
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  Acceptability of non-speculum clinician sampling for cervical screening in older women: A qualitative study.

Authors:  Madeleine Freeman; Jo Waller; Peter Sasieni; Anita Ww Lim; Laura Av Marlow
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 2.136

7.  Evaluation of human-papillomavirus screening for cervical cancer in China's rural population.

Authors:  Ling Li; Ziwen Zheng; Longyu Li
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2019-12-20       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Triage of high-risk human papillomavirus-positive women by methylated POU4F3.

Authors:  Par Bahadur Pun; Yu-Ping Liao; Po-Hsuan Su; Hui-Chen Wang; Yu-Chih Chen; Yaw-Wen Hsu; Rui-Lan Huang; Cheng-Chang Chang; Hung-Cheng Lai
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 6.551

Review 9.  Cancer diagnostic classifiers based on quantitative DNA methylation.

Authors:  Attila T Lorincz
Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.225

10.  Comparison of the costs of HPV testing through community health campaigns versus home-based testing in rural Western Kenya: a microcosting study.

Authors:  Easter Elizabeth Olwanda; James G Kahn; Yujung Choi; Jessica Yasmine Islam; Megan Huchko
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.